2023-04-12 Meeting notes



Discussion items

1 minScribeAll

Marc Johnson is next, followed by Ingolf Kuss 

  • Marc Johnson will take notes after the meeting from the recording.
1 minTCR Board Review


5 minCC / PC Updates

Any updates from the PC and/or CC?

Maccabee Levine advised that the CC 

  • PC will be submitting a budget request for AirTable.  The CC has started preliminary discussions about functionality, cost, OSS alternatives

Tod Olson shared that the PC talked about:

  • WOLFcon contract has been signed, dates fixed at 22-24 Aug. Has not been formally announced yet, likely due later this week.
    • Jesse Koennecke is lead contact across all OLF projects. Will be looking for FOLIO liaison (or group) for planning
    • Any council which wants to have business meetings before or after the conference (to not conflict with other sessions) should make those needs known. E.g. PC will have a business meeting either the day before or after the conference
  • Investigating how to recruit more POs
    • May ask SMEs from SIGs to work on development of features to be ready for developers. RA SIG is piloting this. Also wondering if PC has a role to ensure that SMEs are engaged with POs
1 minElectionsAll

  • Craig McNally advised that the nomination window is now open (Starting today).  Further details can be found on the wiki
10-15 min

Technical Council Sub Groups Updates


Maccabee Levine advised that the AWS hosting costs group met last Friday and confirmed the deliverables were still relevant and divided up tasks to progress this work. The group will be meeting weekly moving forward.

Jeremy Huff advised that the breaking changes group did not meet this week. It will meet next week, after the review by the TC today

Jeremy Huff advised that the presentation prepared by the module evaluation process sub-group is not ready for review today

Craig McNally asked for a volunteer to lead the distributed vs. centralised configuration sub-group? Florian Gleixner volunteered to lead the group

Maccabee Levine will provide an update next week on the preparatory work (feedback from recently onboarded developers and inviting the documentation SIG to be involved) for the onboarding documentation review

5 minUpcoming meetings
  • TC dedicated discussion:   11:00 AM ET
    • Topic:  TCR Improvements - Slide review
  • Tri-Council meeting:   9:30 - 11:00 AM ET
5 minRFCsAll
15-20 minBreaking Changes - Preliminary Review
  • Jeremy Huff shared the latest changes to the breaking changes RFC:
    • Default values should only be provided for optional property
    • General edge module versioning is out of scope for this RFC. However, when they consume FOLIO interfaces, they should follow the specific guidance defined in this RFC
      • Tod Olson asked if the scope of breaking changes is only within FOLIO and not in the interfaces we present?
      • Jeremy Huff advised that the APIs provided by edge modules are not in scope for this RFC. However, this, and other out of scope topics, should be considered for future work in this area
    • Changes to messages published to Kafka are out of scope for this RFC, as our current implementation does not supporting versioning of messages
    • Reference data is also out of scope for this RFC, due to the variation between implementations making guidance challenging to provide
    • A renamed module is considered a new module. Renaming modules is discouraged
  • Craig McNally stated that most of his feedback had been addressed and the scope of this work, the scope has been clarified and the changes are sufficient for moving this RFC to the next phase
  • Tod Olson  suggested an in scope section be added to complement the out of scope section to provide a more complete summary. Marc Johnson advised that the group would address this at their next meeting
  • Craig McNally asked if system interfaces had been covered? Marc Johnson  suggested that this could be considered in scope, as it could be addressed with a few clarifications. Jeremy Huff asked if there was a significant difference between these interfaces and other interfaces? Marc Johnson advised that they could be considered the same. However this might have some subtle implications, as these interfaces are only intended to be consumed by Okapi and thus have a lower area of influence, yet the impact could be different. Jeremy Huff agreed that we should not leave this out, and it will be discussed at the groups next meeting and the RFC will be updated during the draft review phase
  • Craig McNally asked if this is ready for the draft review stage? No objections were raised and thus the current PR will be merged and a new PR will be raised for the next phase
  • Craig McNally  asked if we need a new subgroup for this stage? Jeremy Huff suggested we could invite new folks to join to provide broader feedback
10-15 minOfficially Supported Technologies - UpkeepAll
  • Florian Gleixner advised that he added a header including page properties for some of the release pages for folks to review
  • Craig McNally asked what states do we want for these pages e.g. Draft, Final? 
    • Jeremy Huff suggested Active (for actively being defined by the TC), Supported (for after initial version is finalised, yet may still change) and No longer supported (for after the support period for the release has ended)
    • Marc Johnson wondered how we would come up with the list of statuses, without figuring out the process for maintaining these policy documents
    • Jeremy Huff asked how we determine during the module evaluation process, which release's supported technologies they should be judged against? Marc Johnson and Craig McNally advised that this would be the release currently ongoing at the time of submission
    • Jeremy Huff suggested that we could use Confluence's page restrictions functionality for limiting who can change these documents and add some clarifying text to advise folks contact the TC to submit changes. Craig McNally volunteered to investigate this
    • Craig McNally asked for volunteers for defining a list of statuses and adding a description of the process to the top level page. Jeremy Huff volunteered to take these on
15-20 minTCR Process Improvements

Postponed to next Monday's meeting

Topic Backlog

?Officially Supported Technologies - UpkeepAll

A process was proposed for how to keep these pages up-to-date, we need to revisit and put some processes into place.  As it stands right now, we have members of the community making changes w/o consulting the TC.

Action Items

  • Craig McNally to investigate using Confluence's page restrictions to limit editing of the officially supported technologies lists
  • Jeremy Huff will propose a list of statuses for the officially supported technologies documents
  • Jeremy Huff will add a description of the process for changes to the officially supported technology processes to the top level page